Okay boys and girls, we get to see how "dead" Marvel Comics 1 is

[sfcityduck]

I agree that in the expanded set of books it appears that the "Nov." and the black circle were in different relative positions on some books. But it looks like it may be two groupings. The pixilation is pretty heavy, but it looks to me that three of the books are in the same position relative to one another and the three other books may also be in the relative position to one another. If so, that would suggest that they changed the plate. I find some support for this in that generally the quality of the ink for the "Nov." and black circle appears about the same on each book, even though it varies widely from book to book -- suggesting that the "Nov." and black circle were printed together.

 

If the "Nov." and black circle are moving entirely independently, than that suggests they could have been on two different additional plates or stamps used in the print run. If there was independent movement between the "Nov." and the black circle it doesn't require the conclusion that they were stamped in a second run or after the books were bound. For this printer, movement of the plates was the rule not the exception. As you can see from the pictures, the registration on MC 1s was not consistent from issue to issue.

 

 

[sfcityduck]

If the books were all printed, folded and bound and released in october and more books were released in Nov with the black "dot and nov", there would be no plate. The only method that could have been used is a letter press. You can not run bound printed matter through a sheet fed press. It is very possible that the dot to block out Oct was added first and then came the idea to add Nov via letter press. That would be a die and not a plate.

 

I really don't see any good case for the notion that the books were run through a letter press after being bound. That possibility is foreclosed by the fact that the indicia on the inside front cover was also changed. And it doesn't look like it was changed with a stamp.

[sfcityduck]

 

My Mystic #4 example clearly shows Silver ink being used to make the same changes, so either a (5th) Silver plate was added or a rubber stamp somewhere along the printing process.

 

 

I think that is very strong evidence of an additional fifth plate being used, especially given that's how they normally added metalic ink. That some were done with metalic ink and others in black may reflect that they were using up some excess ink for that fifth plate from an earlier print run of another product -- which would seem like a very Goodman thing to do (cheap cheap cheap).

They wouldn’t add a fifth plate if not needed (like in your example of a metallic ink, or a vivid spot color). Sometimes is done to have a richer black, here it seems they tried to have a different black by adding Cyan to the Torch's line art.

 

The Mystic 4 example shows the printer correcting a date using a rectangle over a July date and a new "Aug." The fact that the printer did that using both silver ink (expensive) and black ink (cheap), suggests to me that they rectangle and "Aug." were on the fifth plate normally used for metalic ink. My guess is that they started out using some metallic ink left over from an earlier print job (because Goodman was cheap) instead of cleaning it out, and then switched to black ink when the silver ran out (because Goodman was cheap).

[VintageComics]

If the books were all printed, folded and bound and released in october and more books were released in Nov with the black "dot and nov", there would be no plate. The only method that could have been used is a letter press. You can not run bound printed matter through a sheet fed press. It is very possible that the dot to block out Oct was added first and then came the idea to add Nov via letter press. That would be a die and not a plate.

 

I really don't see any good case for the notion that the books were run through a letter press after being bound. That possibility is foreclosed by the fact that the indicia on the inside front cover was also changed. And it doesn't look like it was changed with a stamp.

 

My guess is that the uncut cover sheets were modified en masse with the additional slugs, plugs, stamps, plates, etc. (whatever they used)

[Ameri]

Here's a camera shot of a CGC copy with no color touch. The black ink is thick and raised.

 

 

 

[Ameri]

My suspicion, and I don't think anyone has said this before, is that there was a second plate, but the circle wasn't on it. The circle was added to the original plate. The second plate had the Nov and the indicia fix. It's technically possible they were on the same plate, but I'd have to see the indicia on a shifted copy to know for sure.

 

There could have been more than one black plate (with the second one only creating a circle on the OCT cover and black lines on the indicia) as well as a rubber stamp somewhere in the process to create the NOV - because the NOV was obviously moving relative to the black circle over OCT.

 

My Mystic #4 example clearly shows Silver ink being used to make the same changes, so either a (5th) Silver plate was added or a rubber stamp somewhere along the printing process.

 

Now I'm wondering why Goodman changed the cover date on a 2nd book in the Timely family.

 

I'm sure if we had enough copies in hand of Marvel #1 and Mystery #4 to examine we could possibly start making definitive conclusions.

 

The problem is both are tough books (the Mystic #4 being the far less expensive one) and nobody is going to want to donate theirs to the cause and risk damage or loss.

 

Does anyone have a raw Mystic #4 so that they can take a shot of the indicia on the inside front cover and post it here to see if any changes were made on that book's incidia as well like they did on Marvel #1? I assume they would have done the same on the Mystic as they did on the Marvel.

 

Man, if we could get a few copies into the same room it sure would be fun to start comparing them.

 

Here's the indicia on an August overprint copy. Still shows July

 

[VintageComics]

Here's a camera shot of a CGC copy with no color touch. The black ink is thick and raised.

 

 

 

OK, so less likely that a separate plate IMO and more likely the rubber stamp (during the publication process) that DiceX postulated?

 

Also would be curious to know if the black in on the interior indicia was raised or if it felt like the rest of the black in on the interior of the cover.

 

 

 

My suspicion, and I don't think anyone has said this before, is that there was a second plate, but the circle wasn't on it. The circle was added to the original plate. The second plate had the Nov and the indicia fix. It's technically possible they were on the same plate, but I'd have to see the indicia on a shifted copy to know for sure.

 

There could have been more than one black plate (with the second one only creating a circle on the OCT cover and black lines on the indicia) as well as a rubber stamp somewhere in the process to create the NOV - because the NOV was obviously moving relative to the black circle over OCT.

 

My Mystic #4 example clearly shows Silver ink being used to make the same changes, so either a (5th) Silver plate was added or a rubber stamp somewhere along the printing process.

 

Now I'm wondering why Goodman changed the cover date on a 2nd book in the Timely family.

 

I'm sure if we had enough copies in hand of Marvel #1 and Mystery #4 to examine we could possibly start making definitive conclusions.

 

The problem is both are tough books (the Mystic #4 being the far less expensive one) and nobody is going to want to donate theirs to the cause and risk damage or loss.

 

Does anyone have a raw Mystic #4 so that they can take a shot of the indicia on the inside front cover and post it here to see if any changes were made on that book's incidia as well like they did on Marvel #1? I assume they would have done the same on the Mystic as they did on the Marvel.

 

Man, if we could get a few copies into the same room it sure would be fun to start comparing them.

 

 

Here's the indicia on an August overprint copy. Still shows July

 

 

Cool, thanks so much for that.

 

Does this copy have July, or the Black or the Silver August on the front cover?

 

Or do you no longer own this copy?

[Ameri]

Here's a different copy

 

 

 

[Ameri]

Here's a camera shot of a CGC copy with no color touch. The black ink is thick and raised.

 

 

 

OK, so less likely that a separate plate IMO and more likely the rubber stamp (during the publication process) that DiceX postulated?

 

Also would be curious to know if the black in on the interior indicia was raised or if it felt like the rest of the black in on the interior of the cover.

 

 

 

My suspicion, and I don't think anyone has said this before, is that there was a second plate, but the circle wasn't on it. The circle was added to the original plate. The second plate had the Nov and the indicia fix. It's technically possible they were on the same plate, but I'd have to see the indicia on a shifted copy to know for sure.

 

There could have been more than one black plate (with the second one only creating a circle on the OCT cover and black lines on the indicia) as well as a rubber stamp somewhere in the process to create the NOV - because the NOV was obviously moving relative to the black circle over OCT.

 

My Mystic #4 example clearly shows Silver ink being used to make the same changes, so either a (5th) Silver plate was added or a rubber stamp somewhere along the printing process.

 

Now I'm wondering why Goodman changed the cover date on a 2nd book in the Timely family.

 

I'm sure if we had enough copies in hand of Marvel #1 and Mystery #4 to examine we could possibly start making definitive conclusions.

 

The problem is both are tough books (the Mystic #4 being the far less expensive one) and nobody is going to want to donate theirs to the cause and risk damage or loss.

 

Does anyone have a raw Mystic #4 so that they can take a shot of the indicia on the inside front cover and post it here to see if any changes were made on that book's incidia as well like they did on Marvel #1? I assume they would have done the same on the Mystic as they did on the Marvel.

 

Man, if we could get a few copies into the same room it sure would be fun to start comparing them.

 

 

Here's the indicia on an August overprint copy. Still shows July

 

 

Cool, thanks so much for that.

 

Does this copy have July, or the Black or the Silver August on the front cover?

 

Or do you no longer own this copy?

 

I just have the silver one. The above indicia was from this black overprint copy

 

[stock_rotation]

Does anyone have photos of the indicia for MC1? I'm not talking about the ones posted earlier in this thread (one from the GCD, one from a microfiche version).

 

In those 2009 threads, some people posted actual photos of their indicias, but those photos are now gone. I thought I had saved at least one of them, but I did not.

 

Anyone happen to save one/several/any?

[Ameri]

This shot was my old copy bought in the 90's. It was a Nov overprint.

 

[Jaydogrules]

Quite clearly a situation of the same book being produced in two different printings (or "states" if that term makes a person feel better about it). One (Oct) before the other (Nov), with different indicia indicating the different printings. The "why" or "how" doesn't change what actually happened. The "Oct" copy is unquestionably the first printing. A person can try to rationalize or explain what the "Nov" copies are, or how they came to be, but whatever they are , they are not the first printing (or state , incarnation, version, etc) of the book.

 

I'm not sure what the confusion or controversy is about.

 

-J.

[VintageComics]

Does anyone have photos of the indicia for MC1? I'm not talking about the ones posted earlier in this thread (one from the GCD, one from a microfiche version).

 

In those 2009 threads, some people posted actual photos of their indicias, but those photos are now gone. I thought I had saved at least one of them, but I did not.

 

Anyone happen to save one/several/any?

 

I found these on an old backup from that thread.

 

Splash from my old Marvel Comics #1 November.

 

 

 

 

Splash and interior cover from my old Marvel Comics #1 November (same book as above)

 

 

 

 

Marvel Comics #1 splash page

 

 

 

 

I had this saved as an October indicia but have no idea what the source is. The November copy seems to have Vol 1. No 1. Marvel Comics Nov. 1939 added to the October indicia (along with the blacked out portion) but it gets blurry towards the end of the picture above. These are all the pics that I have.

 

 

 

[VintageComics]

Quite clearly a situation of the same book being produced in two different printings

 

Except that it's not clear.

 

A 2nd printing is when there is an order for a second run.

 

At this point it's not very clear why the covers were changed.

 

There is also evidence that it may have been done 'on the fly' rather than as a second print order.

 

Has anyone ever seen a Mystic #4 with only a July cover?

 

It's perplexing that the indicia on the Mystic #4 was not changed but the date on the front cover was.

 

 

 

 

[pemart1966]

If the books were all printed, folded and bound and released in october and more books were released in Nov with the black "dot and nov", there would be no plate. The only method that could have been used is a letter press. You can not run bound printed matter through a sheet fed press. It is very possible that the dot to block out Oct was added first and then came the idea to add Nov via letter press. That would be a die and not a plate.

 

I really don't see any good case for the notion that the books were run through a letter press after being bound. That possibility is foreclosed by the fact that the indicia on the inside front cover was also changed. And it doesn't look like it was changed with a stamp.

 

My guess is that the uncut cover sheets were modified en masse with the additional slugs, plugs, stamps, plates, etc. (whatever they used) [/quote

 

Not knowing anything about the printing process, would they then have printed a second run of October covers (800,000) and then run them through a process whereby the October indica was blacked out and November added on the front cover and then a second process whereby front inside cover indica was also modified?

[Crowzilla]

I do not see the "Nov." moving in relation to the black circle. In fact, they appear to be moving in unison.

 

So if the rows are changes that the Billy Wright copy and the CGC 7.0 copy are switched, we have a top row with an equal wider gap and a bottom row with an equal smaller gap.

 

Wouldn't this tend to support a theory that there were possibly 3 printings?

Would make more sense with a giant (total) print run of 880,000 copies when Action was "only" selling in the 500,000 range and Superman #1 had gone through 3 printings to reach it's 900,000 copy run.

 

[VintageComics]

I do not see the "Nov." moving in relation to the black circle. In fact, they appear to be moving in unison.

 

So if the rows are changes that the Billy Wright copy and the CGC 7.0 copy are switched, we have a top row with an equal wider gap and a bottom row with an equal smaller gap.

 

Not really.

 

The Larson NOV sits considerably lower than the Pay Copy NOV.

 

EDIT: Although the spacing between the NOV and the Circle seems to be identical. You might be onto something.

 

Also, they move left to right as well, as can be evidenced by how much of the white dot (or period / decimal) at the end of the OCT shows.

 

The Pay Copy NOV is overlapping the red 'L' in MARVEL whereas on the Larson it is not.

 

Unless you can prove that there are 2 (or 3) distinctive patterns to the NOV / Circle stamps it's entirely possible that they were just stamps placed somewhere along the assembly line during production and that they moved independent of the plates and possibly even of each other.

 

Wouldn't this tend to support a theory that there were possibly 3 printings?

Would make more sense with a giant (total) print run of 880,000 copies when Action was "only" selling in the 500,000 range and Superman #1 had gone through 3 printings to reach it's 900,000 copy run.

 

As I said in my last paragraph you'd need to find an exact pattern among all NOV / Circle stamps to theorize separate print runs of the NOV copies.

 

 

[Crowzilla]

 

The Larson NOV sits considerably lower than the Pay Copy NOV.

 

EDIT: Although the spacing between the NOV and the Circle seems to be identical. You might be onto something.

 

Also, they move left to right as well, as can be evidenced by how much of the white dot (or period / decimal) at the end of the OCT shows.

 

The Pay Copy NOV is overlapping the red 'L' in MARVEL whereas on the Larson it is not.

 

 

It is the spacing between the NOV and the circle I am referencing. It is clear we have three examples each of 'wide space" and "narrow space" where the Nov and Black circle all look to be struck the same.

 

The placement on the cover seems to vary (like as you show in the Pay Copy vs Larson Copy), but that is a reflection of the poor trimming job with these books. The Pay Copy has the "L" in "Marvel" cut closer across the top and more distant to the right edge than the Larson copy. The Nov and the Circle are the same on each, but because of the trimming of the books their placement seems to be different. Same thing for the Denver copy (where the red at the "L" is completely cut off) vs. the CGC 4.5 copy when comparing the more narrow spaced stamping.

 

[N e r V]

I do not see the "Nov." moving in relation to the black circle. In fact, they appear to be moving in unison.

 

So if the rows are changes that the Billy Wright copy and the CGC 7.0 copy are switched, we have a top row with an equal wider gap and a bottom row with an equal smaller gap.

 

Wouldn't this tend to support a theory that there were possibly 3 printings?

Would make more sense with a giant (total) print run of 880,000 copies when Action was "only" selling in the 500,000 range and Superman #1 had gone through 3 printings to reach it's 900,000 copy run.

 

 

We might not ever be able to prove that but on the surface it sounds logical.

 

We also don't know why Marvel #1 got some extended time on newsstand shelves with Oct. and Nov. dated copies.

 

Was it because the Oct. copies came out later in the month and Goodman wanted more time for it on the newsstand?

Was it because he had some great instant sales data connections during that time that showed it was a blockbuster and he wanted to take as much advantage as possible to maximize its sales?

 

It was his first comic book coming from the pulps too and we know some of the material (Sub-Mariner) was pre existing so maybe the longer shelf life had more to do with Marvel (Mystery) #2 material not being ready until the Dec. dated issues?

 

Marvel Comics #1 exists with 2 cover dates and was on the newsstand longer than a monthly and issue #2 has a unpublished cover of Sub-Mariner as Marvel comics #2 but what we ended up with was Marvel Mystery #2 with the Angel on the cover so maybe how the events of Marvel comics #1 and Marvel Mystery #2 played out are connected as well.

 

Not stating it as a fact but thinking it's possible too.

 

[stock_rotation]

Three things to mention:

 

First, disregard trimming on individual books. I pulled 6 covers into photoshop, rotated every copy so the yellow in Marvel was straight, and then resized every cover so the logos were identical sizes. This gives us a baseline as to where the circle and the logo are positioned on the print

 

Second, The Larson is relatively positioned the same as the Pay copy, it's just that the black plate on the Larson copy is shifted down slightly. The spacing between Nov and the circle are the same.

 

Last, and most important, don't use the white dot in Oct. as an indicator as to whether the black dot moves. What you're seeing when you see more or less of the white dot is the movement of the blue plate, which we already know moved around. There is no "white ink", the word is knocked-out of both the blue, magenta and black plates. Both the black and magenta image in that area is a light screen to transform the blue in that area from straight cyan to the darker purplish-blue, so unless you have a super-high res scan of the cover or you're looking at it in person under a loupe, you're not likely to be able to see the black or magenta screening in that area.